Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16221943›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Who uses the patient internet portal? The PatientSite experience.

Saul N Weingart, David Rind, Zachary Tofias, Daniel Z Sands

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 106 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

106 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 246 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Usability testing finds problems for novice users of pediatric portals.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Preoperative patient activation is predictive of improvements in patient-reported outcomes following minimally invasive lumbar decompression.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Article
  16. Exploring the Digital Divide: Age and Race Disparities in Use of an Inpatient Portal.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2020
    Article
  17. Improving Acceptance of Inpatient Portals: Patients' and Care Team Members' Perspectives.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

46 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Saul N WeingartStoneman Center for Quality Improvement, Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. saul_weingart@dfci.harvard.edu
David Rind
Zachary Tofias
Daniel Z Sands
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Partnering with Patients to Find Adverse EventsK08HS011644 · AHRQ · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI WEINGART, SAUL N · 2001 to 2005
–
AHRQ HHS 1 K08 HS 11644
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAlthough the patient Internet portal is a potentially transformative technology, there is little scientific information about the demographic and clinical characteristics of portal enrollees and the features that they access.

designWe describe two pilot studies of a comprehensive Internet portal called PatientSite. These pilots include a prospective one-year cohort study of all patients who enrolled in April 2003 and a case-control study in 2004 of enrollees and nonenrollees at two hospital-based primary care practices. MEASUREMENTS: The cohort study tracked patient enrollment and features in PatientSite that enrollees accessed, such as laboratory and radiology results, prescription renewals, appointment requests, managed care referrals, and clinical messaging. The case-control study used medical record review to compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of 100 randomly selected PatientSite enrollees and 100 nonenrollees.

resultsPatientSite use grew steadily after its introduction. New enrollees logged in most frequently in the first month, but 26% to 77% of the cohort continued to access the portal at least monthly. They most often examined laboratory and radiology results and sent clinical messages to their providers. PatientSite enrollees were younger and more affluent and had fewer medical problems than nonenrollees.

conclusionExpanding the use of patient portals will require an understanding of obstacles that prevent access for those who might benefit most from this technology.

Indexed as

PatientsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesFemaleHumansInternetMaleMedical AuditMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID16221943
PMCPMC1380201
OpenAlexW2115021051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.